Not only have the White Sox passed the Cubbies in wins/losses and position in the divisions, but here’s the shocker.

The White Sox now have a lower team ERA than the Cubbies.

GoSox2K3

07-25-2003, 09:35 AM

Originally posted by DrCrawdad
Not only have the White Sox passed the Cubbies in wins/losses and position in the divisions, but here’s the shocker.

The White Sox now have a lower team ERA than the Cubbies.

You'd never know any of this just by listing to the local media coverage. Interesting how, according to how the teams are generally covered, this has been a disappointing season for the Sox and the Cubs are making an exciting run for the pennant. Yet, the Sox have a better record and are closer to 1st place!

The Cub-hype machine will never cease.

kempsted

07-25-2003, 09:53 AM

You are so right. Mack, Jerko and Harry - with Mack a Sox fan and Harry supposedly rooting for them both constantly talk about the phenomenal Cubs starting pitching. What they never even suggest is that the Sox pitching is better.

Basballprospectus.com keeps track of a nice starting pitching stat that tries to factor out differences. Basically it is like quality starts but it is a win loss record adjusted for park, assuming league average run production and defense etc.

Here is the link

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/current/snwlreport03.html

Notice that Loaiza is still number 1 and the Sox have two starting pitchers in the top 30 - Loaiza and Colon. The Cubs only have Wood - that's right folks Prior is not on the list

Also notice the 10 worst Starters include Estes of the Cubs. Zambrano made the Flakiest pitcher list (i.e. good starts and horrible starts)

We have one of the best starting pitching staffs in baseball. Do you hear about it on BBTN? No. Local Media NO.

cheeses_h_rice

07-25-2003, 10:46 AM

The SI cover curse strikes again...*****.

:gulp:

FJA

07-25-2003, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by kempsted
You are so right. Mack, Jerko and Harry - with Mack a Sox fan and Harry supposedly rooting for them both constantly talk about the phenomenal Cubs starting pitching. What they never even suggest is that the Sox pitching is better.

Basballprospectus.com keeps track of a nice starting pitching stat that tries to factor out differences. Basically it is like quality starts but it is a win loss record adjusted for park, assuming league average run production and defense etc.

Here is the link

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/current/snwlreport03.html

Notice that Loaiza is still number 1 and the Sox have two starting pitchers in the top 30 - Loaiza and Colon. The Cubs only have Wood - that's right folks Prior is not on the list

Also notice the 10 worst Starters include Estes of the Cubs. Zambrano made the Flakiest pitcher list (i.e. good starts and horrible starts)

We have one of the best starting pitching staffs in baseball. Do you hear about it on BBTN? No. Local Media NO.

The big problem is that everyone keeps saying "Well, if Loaiza can keep it up ..."

It's almost August. Deal with it, Loaiza is for real ... he added another pitch that just kills hitters, which media-type just don't seem to want to believe.

Dadawg_77

07-25-2003, 11:04 AM

Notice how that site rate the Sox staff as the second most unluckiest in the majors.

Vsahajpal

07-25-2003, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by kempsted
You are so right. Mack, Jerko and Harry - with Mack a Sox fan and Harry supposedly rooting for them both constantly talk about the phenomenal Cubs starting pitching. What they never even suggest is that the Sox pitching is better.

Basballprospectus.com keeps track of a nice starting pitching stat that tries to factor out differences. Basically it is like quality starts but it is a win loss record adjusted for park, assuming league average run production and defense etc.

Here is the link

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/current/snwlreport03.html

Notice that Loaiza is still number 1 and the Sox have two starting pitchers in the top 30 - Loaiza and Colon. The Cubs only have Wood - that's right folks Prior is not on the list

Also notice the 10 worst Starters include Estes of the Cubs. Zambrano made the Flakiest pitcher list (i.e. good starts and horrible starts)

We have one of the best starting pitching staffs in baseball. Do you hear about it on BBTN? No. Local Media NO.

Prior was on it last week, and has been on it all year. He missed the start, or else he'd have been on it. His SNW is at 2.0, the lowest qualifier is 2.2. Had he not missed his start this week, he'd be on it with even an average performance.

FWIW, the Zambrano you mentioned is Tampa starter Victor Zambrano., not Carlos Zambrano, who may well join the top 30 (his SNW is 1.9) with a good start tonight. But he'll have a really tough task accomplishing that.

Wood (#10) is on that list, but then again, so are Mulder (ranked #2) and Hudson (#3) so I don't know if anything meaningful can be deduced.

The Cubs' staff SNW is really screwed by Estes (-1.6 in 20 starts). He basically nullifes all the success that Zambrano has had. Too bad the Cubs don't realize this. According to these stats, he is the 2nd worst starter in baseball, lol. Should take the top spot tomorrow at Minute Maid.

maurice

07-25-2003, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by Vsahajpal
The Cubs' staff SNW is really screwed by Estes (-1.6 in 20 starts). He basically nullifes all the success that Zambrano has had. Too bad the Cubs don't realize this. According to these stats, he is the 2nd worst starter in baseball, lol. Should take the top spot tomorrow at Minute Maid.

Estes has been brutal. Do they keep running him out there because of his contract status or something? I'd be interested to see what Cruz can do with regular turns.

BTW, now that we know the 3 PTBN in the Everret deal, who's rumored to be the PTBN in the Lofton/Ramirez deal?

maurice

07-25-2003, 01:58 PM

Originally posted by GoSox2K3
You'd never know any of this just by listing to the local media coverage. Interesting how, according to how the teams are generally covered, this has been a disappointing season for the Sox and the Cubs are making an exciting run for the pennant.

This is terrible. It's amazing that they conveniently forget how many so-called "experts" picked the scrubs to win their division and the Sox to finish behind the twinkies. Revisionist history is becoming a national obsession.

:angry:

Gumshoe

07-25-2003, 02:12 PM

Amen, Maurice. So right about that. I posted elsewhere how all those guys on SI, ESPN, TSN< etc. were all over the potential sleeper aspect of the Cubs. I've also said that our staff is better than the Cubs. The Cubs always blow their load in one month. Far better to end well than begin well.

You sound like President Bush with that revisionist historians remark. Nice.

Gumshoe

maurice

07-25-2003, 02:43 PM

Originally posted by Gumshoe
You sound like President Bush with that revisionist historians remark.

Actually, the folks in his administration are the chief culprits. Some serious pot, kettle, black action going on there.

kempsted

07-25-2003, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by Vsahajpal
Prior was on it last week, and has been on it all year. He missed the start, or else he'd have been on it. His SNW is at 2.0, the lowest qualifier is 2.2. Had he not missed his start this week, he'd be on it with even an average performance.

FWIW, the Zambrano you mentioned is Tampa starter Victor Zambrano., not Carlos Zambrano, who may well join the top 30 (his SNW is 1.9) with a good start tonight. But he'll have a really tough task accomplishing that.

Wood (#10) is on that list, but then again, so are Mulder (ranked #2) and Hudson (#3) so I don't know if anything meaningful can be deduced.

The Cubs' staff SNW is really screwed by Estes (-1.6 in 20 starts). He basically nullifes all the success that Zambrano has had. Too bad the Cubs don't realize this. According to these stats, he is the 2nd worst starter in baseball, lol. Should take the top spot tomorrow at Minute Maid.

But if you compare the SNWAR -- "Support-Neutral Wins Above Replacement-level": on the list between the two teams - even dropping Estes for the Cubs and Wright for the Sox the Sox staff is better.

So if you line them up our number 1 starter is better than there number one, our number 2 is better than there number 2, our number 3 is slightly under their number 3, and our number 4 is better than there number 4. Since Estes is one of the worst pitchers in the league :smile: our 5 is still better than their 5 no matter who we put in.

I am not saying these stats are the be all and end all. BUt they are more objective then peoples feelings about the staffs tend to be and we have nothing to be ashamed of.